[Air-L] The difficult conversation we don't seem to be having

[Sky Croeser]

Hi everyone,

I can see that many people find this conversation very unpleasant, and wish
for it to stop. Or for us to declare a metaphorical ceasefire (while not
actually calling for a real one). Or perhaps to have the conversation
elsewhere so that no one has to look at it. I remind you that it is
possible to set up a mail filter (for example, sending all emails with the
header words "The difficult conversation" or even all emails from my
address) to a separate folder, or even for immediate deletion. It is
certainly very unpleasant to confront the fact that we have deep
disagreements within our membership.

I will, as many people have suggested, certainly get in touch off-list with
those who are in favour of taking some action so that we can continue the
discussion (please be patient with me, that may take a week or so). I
particularly understand that for those who want us to act in solidarity
with Palestinians, many of the messages here must be gruelling to read.

Perhaps it would be better if we had never had this conversation. Perhaps
it would be better to let the lovely words on our website and in our calls
for proposals and so on, about a commitment to academic freedom and
supporting marginalised scholars, about inclusivity and diversity, sit
unexamined.

I admit that when I brought up this conversation I was not expecting
everyone to agree. I expected some people to say that it's not our place to
make political statements. I expected some people to argue for a
watered-down "we generally deplore violence by everyone everywhere"
statement while others wanted something firmer and more meaningful. I
expected a few people to call me antisemitic or get annoyed with me.
Perhaps even for someone to try to get me fired. (And for those offering
words of personal support, I appreciate it but please don't worry about me.)

What I did not actually expect was that some AoIR members would very
publicly and openly speak about the justice and necessity and inevitability
of the mass killing and punishment of civilians (as long as they are
Palestinian).

My previous email singled out some of Ayelet's statements. It was, as I
hope I made clear, a forwarded and hopefully de-identified message from a
Palestinian colleague.

I debated removing Ayelet's name and trying to make the email more general,
but given that our Palestinian colleagues already face significant
censorship and don't feel safe posting directly to the list, I did not want
to further water down the message. So I will take responsibility for the
claim that this is "harassment" ("here in Israel, we do not believe in the
harassment of individuals during academic discussions" - We have certainly
seen on this list how committed Israeli academics are to professional
behaviour and avoiding personal remarks during discussions.)

Personally, I do not think that pointing out the consequences and meaning
of someone's public statements, or asking them whether they are sure that
the principles they argue for are internally consistent and reasonable, is
harassment.

If you say it is necessary to stop all fuel to Gaza even when that fuel is
used to power incubators for premature babies who will therefore die, and
that you can imagine no other solution and no alternatives to the current
actions of the Israeli government...it is reasonable for someone to reply
that this argument demonstrates that change is unlikely to come from within
Israeli society.

I hope that we have also colleagues in Israel who oppose the actions of
their government, even if they do not feel safe saying so publicly in the
current context.

I am not a European - although I have European ancestry none of my
ancestors were born in Europe since my great-grandparents left Greece. I
don't know what that makes me, however, I do acknowledge that I am living
on stolen Aboriginal land. I like to think that I work actively to
recognise it and take material action in response, much as that often seems
inadequate. (We might also point to the horrific indefinite detention of
asylum seekers in Australia, or Australia's involvement in Iraq and
Afghanistan, all of which I have protested.) We can also recognise that the
Australian government has joined the US, UK, and other in providing direct
support for the bombing of Yemen
<https://greens.org.au/news/media-release/australian-support-us-and-uk-strikes-yemen-dangerous-escalation-time-peace>.


If for that reason those calling for an academic boycott of Israeli
institutions feel at some point that it should extend to Australian
academic institutions, I will be in support.



On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 at 9:55 pm, Ayelet Baram-Tsabari <ayelet at technion.ac.il>
wrote:

> Hello Sky,
> While I appreciate your contribution to the discussion, here in Israel, we
> do not believe in the harassment of individuals during academic discussions.
> I view this discussion as important, but if you are unable to communicate
> in a professional manner, might I suggest that you have someone else review
> your emails before you send them?
> I also ask those involved in the discussion to look up the definition of
> ‘genocide’ before they use the term and to review the actions of their own
> governments to previous terror attacks.
> Finally, I suggest that Europeans who live in glass houses on Aboriginal
> land would be a little less enthusiastic about throwing stones.
> Best,
> Prof. Ayelet Baram-Tsabari
>
>